Ala'a O Oteir1, Karen Smith2, Johannes U Stoelwinder3, James Middleton4, Paul A Jennings5. 1. Department of Community Emergency Health and Paramedic Practice, Monash University Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: alaa.oteir@monash.edu. 2. Research and Evaluation, Ambulance Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Rehabilitation Studies Unit, Sydney Medical School-Northern, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Department of Community Emergency Health and Paramedic Practice, Monash University Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Ambulance Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spinal cord injuries occur worldwide; often being life-threatening with devastating long term impacts on functioning, independence, health, and quality of life. OBJECTIVES: Systematic review of the literature to determine the efficacy of cervical spinal immobilisation (vs no immobilisation) in patients with suspected cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI); and to provide recommendations for prehospital spinal immobilisation. METHODS: Searches were conducted of the Cochrane library, CINAHL, EMBASE, Pubmed, Scopus, Web of science, Google scholar, and OvidSP (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and DARE) databases. Studies were included if they were relevant to the research question, published in English, based in the prehospital setting, and included adult patients with traumatic injury. RESULTS: The search identified 1471 citations, of which eight observational studies of variable quality were included. Four studies were retrospective cohorts, three were case series and one a case report. Cervical collar application was reported in penetrating trauma to be associated with unadjusted increased risk of mortality in two studies [(OR, 8.82; 95% CI, 1.09-194; p=0.038) & (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.35-3.13)], concealment of neck injuries in one study and increased scene time in another study. While, in blunt trauma, one study indicated that immobilisation might be associated with worsened neurological outcome (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.03-3.99; p=0.04, unadjusted). We did not attempt to combine study results due to significant heterogeneity of study design and outcome measures. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of high-level evidence on the effect of prehospital cervical spine immobilisation on patient outcomes. There is a clear need for large prospective studies to determine the clinical benefit of prehospital spinal immobilisation as well as to identify the subgroup of patients most likely to benefit.
BACKGROUND:Spinal cord injuries occur worldwide; often being life-threatening with devastating long term impacts on functioning, independence, health, and quality of life. OBJECTIVES: Systematic review of the literature to determine the efficacy of cervical spinal immobilisation (vs no immobilisation) in patients with suspected cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI); and to provide recommendations for prehospital spinal immobilisation. METHODS: Searches were conducted of the Cochrane library, CINAHL, EMBASE, Pubmed, Scopus, Web of science, Google scholar, and OvidSP (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and DARE) databases. Studies were included if they were relevant to the research question, published in English, based in the prehospital setting, and included adult patients with traumatic injury. RESULTS: The search identified 1471 citations, of which eight observational studies of variable quality were included. Four studies were retrospective cohorts, three were case series and one a case report. Cervical collar application was reported in penetrating trauma to be associated with unadjusted increased risk of mortality in two studies [(OR, 8.82; 95% CI, 1.09-194; p=0.038) & (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.35-3.13)], concealment of neck injuries in one study and increased scene time in another study. While, in blunt trauma, one study indicated that immobilisation might be associated with worsened neurological outcome (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.03-3.99; p=0.04, unadjusted). We did not attempt to combine study results due to significant heterogeneity of study design and outcome measures. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of high-level evidence on the effect of prehospital cervical spine immobilisation on patient outcomes. There is a clear need for large prospective studies to determine the clinical benefit of prehospital spinal immobilisation as well as to identify the subgroup of patients most likely to benefit.
Authors: Daniel K Kornhall; Jørgen Joakim Jørgensen; Tor Brommeland; Per Kristian Hyldmo; Helge Asbjørnsen; Thomas Dolven; Thomas Hansen; Elisabeth Jeppesen Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2017-01-05 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Tim Nutbeam; Rob Fenwick; Jason E Smith; Mike Dayson; Brian Carlin; Mark Wilson; Lee Wallis; Willem Stassen Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2022-06-20 Impact factor: 3.803
Authors: Tim Nutbeam; Rob Fenwick; Barbara May; Willem Stassen; Jason E Smith; Lee Wallis; Mike Dayson; James Shippen Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2021-07-31 Impact factor: 2.953